By: slr2007mclaren
2/07/2009
11:22 am Yahoo! Profile:
slr2007mclaren Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Tanner thought it wasn't fair that he had to do it yet Abbott didn't have to |
|
By: m1nokey123
2/07/2009
11:38 am Yahoo! Profile:
m1nokey123 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I have no objection to Mr Abott opposing the ban, and I understand the bit about personal responsibility and nanny state. But to insinuate that there is nothing wrong with the practice and make light of it???? I'm ok so it must be ok???? He may be ok, but my younger brother has scarring on his lungs and has never smoked a puff himself in his life, it's all thanks to my parents, who didn't know better. |
|
By: m1nokey123
2/07/2009
11:40 am Yahoo! Profile:
m1nokey123 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| They do now so their grand kids will fair better. Strictly outside away from the kids and never in the car. Wish they'd quit altogether....my kids are always on their backs now. |
|
By: larkhill50
2/07/2009
11:45 am Yahoo! Profile:
larkhill50 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I don't accept this "nanny state" stuff. Responsible people will not be affected in the slightest, irresponsible ones will have to re-think their attitudes or pay the price. |
|
By: vegitamite97
2/07/2009
11:46 am Yahoo! Profile:
vegitamite97 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I have no objection to Mr Abott opposing the ban, and I understand the bit about personal responsibility and nanny state. But to insinuate that there is nothing wrong with the practice and make light of it???? I'm ok so it must be ok????
================
this is like my take on Abbott as well. How dare he lighten the issue . |
|
By: m1nokey123
2/07/2009
11:50 am Yahoo! Profile:
m1nokey123 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Lark my personal opinion is the same as yours. But I can understand that arguement. Mr Abott, former Health Minister, as good as tells us all go for it. That makes my blood boil and is not simply as Slr suggests me not getting the nanny state arguement. |
|
By: yfancythat
2/07/2009
12:04 pm Yahoo! Profile:
yfancythat Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
That’s the problem you don’t understand the bit about personal responsibility, education it is time you took on the personal responsibility.
We have gone banned mad if we keep this up their will be no such thing is personal responsibility you have to have your whole live govern an controlled by fines you call that a life. That is no more then being a slave, as a slave don’t have personal responsibility, they live by the threat of punishment.
There are wost toxic things on the market that every day trades man use in your home that damage your health our your child health, wake up.
We should ban fly spray an roch spray too because some miss use it to get a buzz, the world is full of stuppet people.
It is down to education, there are talking about making laws if people willing damage their DNA can be charged because it is damaging the unborn child.
Were does it stop > we know that at the G 8 summit they lifted the smoking banned for the elite just like in the gamble houses for the high rollers.
Maybe if you are of the elite your smoke does not hurt others who work their.
If two rule society one for you an one for them |
|
By: larkhill50
2/07/2009
12:21 pm Yahoo! Profile:
larkhill50 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Indeed world IS full of stuppet people. |
|
By: humblegenius_fp
2/07/2009
12:22 pm Yahoo! Profile:
humblegenius_fp Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I dont see how stopping idiots from smoking in cars means we are "becoming slaves to the man".
Until the child HAS A CHOICE, then their rights to a healthy environment are above those of anothers choice. |
|
By: qikvtec
2/07/2009
12:28 pm Yahoo! Profile:
qikvtec Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Until the child HAS A CHOICE, then their rights to a healthy environment are above those of anothers choice.
************************* ************************* *********
I certainly understand and appreciate your viewpoint, however I don't see how spending millions creating and enforcing a law that will enmasse be ignored by those it targets, is a practical use of resources.
It's not like NSW doens't have much more pressing issues to resolve. |
|
By: pathogan70
2/07/2009
12:31 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pathogan70 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Us boring reformed smokers will always have the high moral ground, as we can always just feel good telling people to simply give the habit away as we so righteously did...
While your Nanna is being robbed/bashed/raped, you might lose faith in a police force sitting by the roadside or at sets of traffic lights waiting for dirty evil smokers... |
|
By: jonjonson56
2/07/2009
12:35 pm Yahoo! Profile:
jonjonson56 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
""My parents both smoked heavily when I was a kid. Now has it done me any harm?""
---------
Sure has
=============
By: slr2007mclaren
he's talking about personal responsibility
but lefties wouldn't understand that concept
--------
Idiot statement
=========================
http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Smoking-ban -for-cars-in-force-in-SA/2007/05/31/1180205402770. html
May 31, 2007 - 2:24PM
Advertisement
Advertisement
One of the last havens for smokers, the family car, is under siege in South Australia - and other states may soon follow.
South Australia has banned anyone lighting up in their car while carrying children as passengers.
The smoking ban is an Australian first and applies when children under the age of 16 are in the car. |
|
By: buzzanddidj
2/07/2009
12:35 pm Yahoo! Profile:
buzzanddidj Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
'I certainly understand and appreciate your viewpoint, however I don't see how spending millions creating and enforcing a law that will enmasse be ignored by those it targets, is a practical use of resources'
WHAT 'millions' ?
e are talking about police patrols in the normal course of duty
The same patrols that look out for drivers on hand-held mobiles
The public has a role here, to report, as well
In BOTH offences
. |
|
By: m1nokey123
2/07/2009
12:40 pm Yahoo! Profile:
m1nokey123 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
While your Nanna is being robbed/bashed/raped, you might lose faith in a police force sitting by the roadside or at sets of traffic lights waiting for dirty evil smokers...
+++
Who are abusing and killing children. |
|
By: humblegenius_fp
2/07/2009
12:42 pm Yahoo! Profile:
humblegenius_fp Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
While your Nanna is being robbed/bashed/raped, you might lose faith in a police force sitting by the roadside or at sets of traffic lights waiting for dirty evil smokers...
================
*smacks forehead* so are you saying police should not have a presence on the road catching those speeding, drink driving, using mobile phones, (I dont care much for the seatbelts thing, if people are stupid enough not to wear one thats to their detriment) and general presence so people are aware that they are activily patrolling the areas for vandals etc. |
|
By: pathogan70
2/07/2009
12:43 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pathogan70 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| ... An excellent example of the high moral ground. |
|
By: humblegenius_fp
2/07/2009
12:45 pm Yahoo! Profile:
humblegenius_fp Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| path, its not an example of a moral ground, its about looking after the interest of those who are unable to do so for themselves. |
|
By: qikvtec
2/07/2009
12:49 pm Yahoo! Profile:
qikvtec Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
WHAT 'millions' ?
e are talking about police patrols in the normal course of duty
The same patrols that look out for drivers on hand-held mobiles
************************* ************************* *********
When have you ever known govt authorities to be frugal with their spending? How much would you anticipate the public awareness campaign would cost?
Why not just make it legal to walk up to the bonehead smoking with his/her kid in the vehicle, and put the damn thing out with a fire extinguisher. |
|
By: pathogan70
2/07/2009
12:50 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pathogan70 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
*also smacks forehead*...
Where exactly did I say anything about speeding, drink driving, mobile phones, or seat belts in relation to this topic (smoking in cars)?
For the record, my personal opinion is that speeding is a very lucrative part of police operations, and they spend too much resources on one safety issue and neglect other serious causes of accidents. For example, tiredness... its very dangerous, but more difficult to police and not as lucrative, so they mostly pretend it does not exist.
The beauty of the written word, is that you can read it several times if you need to digest the information at your own pace. So really, rather than ask me about unrelated topics, maybe go over things again till you understand it. |
|
By: pathogan70
2/07/2009
12:50 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pathogan70 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
*also smacks forehead*...
Where exactly did I say anything about speeding, drink driving, mobile phones, or seat belts in relation to this topic (smoking in cars)?
For the record, my personal opinion is that speeding is a very lucrative part of police operations, and they spend too much resources on one safety issue and neglect other serious causes of accidents. For example, tiredness... its very dangerous, but more difficult to police and not as lucrative, so they mostly pretend it does not exist.
The beauty of the written word, is that you can read it several times if you need to digest the information at your own pace. So really, rather than ask me about unrelated topics, maybe go over things again till you understand it. |
|
By: qikvtec
2/07/2009
12:50 pm Yahoo! Profile:
qikvtec Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
While your Nanna is being robbed/bashed/raped, you might lose faith in a police force sitting by the roadside or at sets of traffic lights waiting for dirty evil smokers...
************************* ************************* *********
assuming of course I had any faith to lose. |
|
By: markus5006
2/07/2009
12:52 pm Yahoo! Profile:
markus5006 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Of course children should not be subjected to smoke in enclosed spaces, but the parents should be excercising responsibility for the health of their littlies - It's called love."
the reason for this law is exactly that... these parents do NOT take repsonisibility for their actions (i.e. smoking in the car with your kids) so the gov has to do it for them..
if people had more brains then perhaps these kind of laws wouldnt be needed? |
|
By: buzzanddidj
2/07/2009
12:55 pm Yahoo! Profile:
buzzanddidj Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Have you noticed, in this thread, who supports Abbott's claim that smoking in cars with kids is not harmful ?
The opponents of ANY Labor initiative
Not on it's MERIT
But on it's ORIGIN
. |
|
By: qikvtec
2/07/2009
12:56 pm Yahoo! Profile:
qikvtec Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
if people had more brains then perhaps these kind of laws wouldnt be needed?
************************* ************************* *********
Largely these are people that believe they have good odds of beating the pokies.
Law or no law, it won't stop these morons practicing the filthy habit in their vehicles with thier kids. |
|
By: andreihicks
2/07/2009
12:57 pm Yahoo! Profile:
andreihicks Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Do we not feel though that things have gone a little bit too far?
Take a look at the behaviour in the 1970s, never seemed to do all of us any harm growing up did it?
I often think that times have moved on and a lot of time not for the bettter. |
|
